Sniping, regardless of what kind, shouldn't be a bannable offense

When you transfer a name, you are 100% aware of the risks you're taking. There is a possibility of someone else taking it, though it may be slim, it's possible. It's essentially like entering the Wildy. You are aware that if you die, you can possibly lose all your items. If you choose to enter, and you sadly die, it's no one's fault but your own.
On another note....how can Sniping be a bannable offense but not Luring? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the main defense for why Luring shouldn't be one is that it was an 'in-game mechanic', or something of that sort....how is Sniping not similar?
Thanks for reading, oh and btw, in cases where you sell a name and then snipe it back, I think those are fine to ban.

 

Sniping should not be fine if people know a sale/transfer is going on.

 

I think its wrong that a user who knows that someone is selling a rare name would snipe the name, especially if they're both from sythe, it undermines the trust issue we should all hold with each other, its like recovering an account, someone owned it, then its been stolen.

 

Once the display name has been changed all rights of ownership have been given up. That's the risk they take. I still have mixed feelings on this.

 

I think it's bannable if someone knows the other person is selling/transferring it, though if it's just a "random snipe" that should be okay in my judgement.

 

It is bannable because a user is either selling or buying a rare name. So essentially, you are stealing from the buyer.

 

I don't mean to say Sniping is good or justify it, but to me it seems very similar to luring......it'd seem illogical to have one be OK, and the other not.

 

I don't agree at all. I do not think sniping is similar to luring in any way. In the case of luring it is solely dependent on game play. If you are not as good and accustomed to runescape gameplay you are more susceptible to being lured. However when it comes to "name sniping" you are dealing with something outside of the physical gameplay. Someone payed real money for the name and they do not deserve to be ripped out of that money.

If I started a name selling service with extremely expensive names going for 100m each. I started selling and kept them added on my friends list. Right after the trade I just snipe it back and sell again. You don't think I should be banned for this?

It is scamming, simple as that.

 

How about no more "rare name shops"
Just to prevent it all together.

There is nothing you can do.

 

In the case of name transferring, if you are not as familiar with how to transfer them, you're more likely to get yours sniped...I'm pretty sure the rare name sellers have transferred several names successfully themselves, as they are more familiar with it.

People who spend hours getting their gold and rares or purchasing them for real money don't deserve to get ripped off either.

 

Sniping display names has absolutely nothing to do with luring and the two don't even vaguely correlate.

If you sell a name, and than avidly try and steal it back, that to me is scamming and those users should be punished.

 

No, not the true story. Sorry Watson. Totally different story. Ban discussion isn't allowed, either way.

 

Pretty sure that was Rstm.
And..

Well let me explain how I think they do then...
Luring is the taking of someone else's possessions, often through means of manipulation. Sniping is the taking of someone else's name, due to it being freed up.
Bottom line is the both involve some form of stealing. Though, in my opinion, luring is worse. You're using someone's naiveness to your own advantage, basically it's dishonest. You're tricking someone into believing they can become Rich, by coming in the Wildy.
So, what I'm meaning to say is, either allow Sniping and Luring, or ban them both, because it seems odd to have one OK and the other not.

 

Luring is different to sniping. I see it more as an MM stealing the account during a trade. The MM knows a trade is going on - he knows full well that it has nothing to do with him (besides keep the trade safe), but decides anyways to take it.

 

So if I know someone has full bandos and I lure him I'm technically stealing from him and should be banned?

 

I have transferred 3 names in my time, I have never had any problems with it being sniped by the seller.

Yeah, however there is a big difference. As for the people getting lured they have control over the situation, they are losing their items because they are not accustomed to aspects of the game. Whereas sniping of names is not something the user can control or prevent.

And as for your last quote, I see no difference between the seller and other users doing it. What if a seller of the names has a friend snipe it for them and just gives them the name back to sell. It is the same concept just a different user. Plus I find it contradictory that you find it fine for the seller to be banned if he does it, however when other users do it, then it is just fine. It is still scamming / stealing or making people lose their thing like that staking analogy you provided. What makes any difference who is doing it. Anyone that does it should get the same punishment.

There are not that many incidents of this happening anyways.

 

I'm going to use the same logic I do a lot for these stupid banning rules. You don't need to have an account to do this, so how the fuck does banning the person for something so trivial help anyone?

 

If someone has the intentions of sniping a name back after they or someone else has sold it, that's stealing, which should be punishable if caught. To me:

Sniping names = fine.
Sniping names with the intentions of stealing something sold = not fine.

 

Before I post my opinion, could someone clarify something for me please:

1. A 'rare' name is released into the general poll after a user purchases it
2. This user changes his name to the rare name after 'x' number of days
3. "Sniping" is when someone(probably the initial seller) takes the name back before the purchaser can change the name. Is this correct?

 

All of this is correct. I didn't quite understand point 1. but I am assuming you mean that everyone has access to it. If so then yes.